How "context" Works In Holy Scripture

[Kromovaracun]

This is a 6-minute argument I'm sure we're all very familiar with. It pretty much summarises what "context" means to people who are attached to their holy books.

It's also entertaining. Enjoy!

[Svejk]

I preferred Toy Story.

[benhilton]

Hmmm..... Let me see now.....The Bible , a 1000 page document put together from ancient scriptures that were preserved over the centuries ( remember printing of books only began in the 17th c. ) . These scriptures refer to the ancient history of humanity , some of them go back thousands of years ( I'm not an expert on the timeline ). Somebody puts together a 6min cartoon in which one cartoon character humiliates the other cartoon character . There is a good reason why they use cartoon characters - you can make the one you want to humiliate say what you want and lose his temper when you want .
"...It pretty much summarises what "context" means to people who are attached to their holy books " - No , it most definitely DOESN'T .
Hansard , the Official record of Parliament - if I picked from there some of the things that MP's have said - with the intention of making a fool of a person who believed in parliamentary democracy - and put them together in a 6min cartoon so that I could make the cartoon character who believed in parliamentary democracy say what I want and lose his temper when I want , would that pretty much sum up what parliamentary democracy was ? I don't think so - and would I do such a thing anyway ? ...No.. because I'd only end up making a fool of myself .

[jim360]

It is satirical, yes, but there's a serious point in there. The "taking things out of context" argument is traditionally only applied to the parts of the Bible that are, shall we say, less than savoury. Which is only fine if you start off by accepting the truth of the thing. Granted people don't shout and flap their arms like that but there is often this response if you quote passages such as the story of Judah and Tamar, or Lot and his Daughters etc etc. Passages that are there but "have to be taken in context", apparently, while all the feel-good passages are universal. That's just inconsistent and it does happen.

[Kromovaracun]

Indeed, it's not accurate in tone. But this is exactly the kind of intellectual cowardice people tend to display when their pet holy book gets criticised (and sometimes, those believers I have met who believe said books to be sources of morality and clarity *do* get shouty and wave their hands around. Because they tend to be profoundly stupid.)

[beso]

Eye of the Python that followed it was fabulous.

[RATTER15]

Excellent!!!

[naomi24]

Satirical pieces like this make uncomfortable watching for apologists. Despite their protestations, there is no other context in which the verses quoted – and many others - can be taken.

[beso]

I like to ask the believers in exactly which context does the debauched advice become rational.

When is genocide OK? When is it right to punish the third and fourth generation for the sins of someone they never met? When do we stone children for disobedience? When is it right to persecute same sex lovers?

[beso]

Religion has been the primary barrier to the advancement of human morality for thousands of years.

Abrahamic religion is about tradition without comprehension. No thinking human could respect its deeply flawed, misogynist perspectives.

[ladybirder]

Hurrah to that beso.

Thanks for posting that clip kromo. I have squirrelled it away for future use.